USC's Elephant Defense

One of the more confusing aspects of USC Trojan Football in 2006 pertained to the "new look" used by the defensive line. As most die hard Trojan fans are aware Pete Carroll is a noted Monte Kiffin disciple and has employed a 4-3 defense with one gap defensive responsibilities and a mix of secondary zone coverage schemes (e.g. Cover 2) throughout his entire career. So did the Trojan defense suddenly change in 2006 and convert to a 3-4 scheme as several newspapers reported and some commentators believed? Well, the short answer is "No" but it will take a bit of explanation to understand why and what is all the confusion about...

For clarification first we need to start with defining some specific defensive alignment terms used by coaches throughout football. The term used to specify exactly where a defender lines up is called a "technique spot" and there is a common numbering system used by most teams. The legendary Paul "Bear" Bryant of Alabama football lore is the coach most often cited for developing this numbering scheme. However, Bum Phillips the former coach of the Houston Oilers also reportedly had a hand in creating the system when he was a high school coach in Texas.  Regardless of  who developed what it was considered a badge of honor to know the technique spots and different blocking methods used in regard to each alignment position. Today all coaches at the high school level on up can rattle of these technique spots instantly. Here is a graphic that shows a simple sequential numbering scheme for example.

Sequential Numbering of Technique Spots


Starting from the center position in the graphic at left the first alignment spots are called either zero techniques or direct shade techniques. The numbers then move either left to right or right to left indicating the next alignment spots referencing off of the offensive player's shoulder. In the case of a guard for example an inside shoulder alignment by the defender is called a 1 technique, a direct alignment is a 2 technique, and an alignment on the outside shoulder of a guard is a 3 technique. The numbers generally continue all the way out to 9 technique position which is when a defensive rush end aligns wide outside of a tight end in order to speed rush the quarterback from the outside. Sometimes this is also referred to as a jet alignment by coaches.

Some coaches like Bill Doba (former coach at Washington State) use the sequential numbering scheme outline above first for simplicity.  In addition however and confusing things somewhat is that most coaches like to label the direct shade spots on the guard, tackle, and tight end as "2", "4", and "6" techniques while others prefer the simpler sequential numbering scheme above. From what I can read Pete Carroll and the USC defense used the classical method outlined below.  It really does not matter which numbering system you use as long as you are consistent and using the same terminology as the person you are speaking to. Below he is an example of the more historical numbering scheme for comparison. On the left side in this graphic are the technique spots and to the right side are the "gaps" used to identify the lane through which running plays are designated. The "i" designations merely denote inside alignments for the defenders. Again this all varies slightly team to team and coach to coach but is standard in principle across all teams in high school on up to the NFL. USC uses this method outlined below.

Classical or Generic Numbering of Technique Spots



Unfortunately what most fans are more familiar with is the simpler personnel classification of a 4-3 alignment meaning 4 down lineman and 3 linebackers or a 3-4 meaning three down lineman and 4 linebackers. Unfortunately this simplistic designation has stopped meaning much in today's highly evolved level of football schemes and it is probably confusing more that helping these days. Here are two charts showing a traditional 4-3 look versus a normal 3-4 for clarification. The first is a stereotypical 4-3 diagram over alignment with one gap responsibilities for each of the defenders.



Here is what a stereotypical 3-4 diagram looks like for a team that plays this alignment. Of course the outside linebackers in this scheme often drop down closer to the line of scrimmage on some plays so it can look like either a five man line or a three man front line.

There are a couple of key difference between the two alignments. First in a normal 4-3 there are four lineman in a three point stance versus only 3 down lineman in three point stances in a 3-4. Second there is a difference in the exact alignment spots. In a 3-4 for example the defenders usually line up in a direct shade technique straight up on the defender. In a 4-3 they usually (but not always) line up in the gaps between the offensive players. There are several different types of 4-3 alignments such as the 4-3 under which USC plays, the 4-3 over, the 4-3 stack, as well as other more complex variations. Each one has a slightly different tweak in terms of alignments. The key difference to keep in mind though is in terms of technique spots and gap responsibilities. In a normal 4-3 alignment the defenders are only responsible for "one gap" coverage and attack into that space on the snap of the ball. In the traditional 3-4 defense the three down linemen are often responsible for "two gaps" and don't always immediately attack into the open space. Instead they read and react on many plays instead of automatically attacking. For this simple reason linebackers are the ones making most of the tackles in a 3-4 defense while the linemen are trying to occupy defenders and keep the blockers away from the linebackers. Complicating things is the reality that even in a 3-4 scheme the lineman are often playing one gap and not two by slanting one way at the snap of the ball and have the linebackers slant the other way. Just don't expect the announcers to ever pick up on this or explain it on TV. There are pro's and con's to each scheme and which one a team plays depends more upon the nature of their athletes and the coaches philosophy. Obviously all the variations can and do work well. And of course there are more versions and combinations of the two styles than the simple extremes I outlined here.

So after this long dorkathon of an introduction how does this all relate back to USC's defensive so called elephant alignment of 2006? Well first it is important to understand that the USC defense actually lines up in different technique spots play by play and game by game to take advantage of individual match ups and tendencies. (Read the Pete Carroll article on this site about USC's Base Defense). The announcers on TV never bother to state the actual details on the defensive alignments except for the obvious stuff like, "the Trojans showed blitz on that play", or "USC was in a nickel package on that one". Why? Frankly I doubt that most commentators even know what a technique spot is except for a few former players or coaches like Bob Davies for example. On a specialty show like NFL Playbook on the NFL network you will of course hear about it in some of their explanations. However if you want to understand the game at a higher level you should realize that just as the offense lines up in different formations so does the defensive alignment change in response in a variety of subtle ways. Here are some actual pictures for example from USC's base alignments.

Here is an end zone shot of the common base defense used by USC during most seasons.  Technically it is called an Under alignment but we'll save the details of that for another post for the future.  Unfortunately the camera man on TV cut off the USC defender to the right of the screen #10 Brian Cushing but the picture is worth noting for several reasons. First as you can see the Trojan defenders are lined up in the gaps of the defense and are not aligned directly over the Arizona State Sun Devil offensive lineman. On the snap they charged into the gaps. So right away you know it is not a traditional 3-4 alignment with two gap responsibility up front. If it was a 3-4 scheme Ellis would be directly over the center in a zero technique while Jackson and Moala would be directly heads up on the tackles in four technique alignments. Also if you study the alignment spots one by one you'll notice the Nose Tackle #49 Sedrick Ellis is aligned to the strong side of the formation and the other defensive tackle is aligned in what is called the 3 technique position to the weak side of the formation.  The two defensive ends #96 Lawrence Jackson and #10 Brian Cushing (just out of the picture to the right) are in 5 Technique alignments outside the offensive line's tackle positions.  there is a single safety deep on the play (#29 Taylor Mays) making this a probably Cover 1 scheme in the secondary. Overall however this is still the same 4-3 under alignment by definition of the technique spots and gap responsibilities.  From a personnel point of view it was confusing to fans and announcers in 2006 since Brian Cushing plays in an upright two point stance and is a converted linebacker playing defensive end in 2006.  For simplicity the coaches let him play defensive end in an upright two point stance instead of a 3 point stance where he would have to learn different skills with his footwork etc.

Under Defensive Alignment



This alignment above is not the only one however that USC plays by a long shot.  For example here is a good end zone shot of USC's defensive alignment in 2006 from the game against California. If you look closely you can easily make out the basic 4-3 nature of the defense up front with two safeties deep in a Cover 2 shell look.  This next alignment is called a 4-3 Over alignment.

4-3 Over Alignment Cal Game 2006

The image is a little blurry but again you can see clearly that the USC defense is lined up in the "gaps" of the defenders and preparing to defend single gaps as is the norm since Pete Carroll arrived. This actually looks more like a 4-3 Over alignment and not the Under style.  Note this time however that the Nose Tackle Sedrick Ellis is aligned in a 1 Technique spot off the shoulder of the center to the weak side of the formation.  In the under alignment he is to the strong side (TE side). The other defensive tackle is in a 3 technique spot to the strong side of the defense (again opposite the previous picture).  Once again the defensive ends Jackson and Cushing are both in 5 technique spots outside the tackles. Sometimes Cushing lines up on the opposite side as he and Lawrence Jackson do flip back and forth depending upon match ups and the tight end location. This stand up defensive end is what confused people and the fact that Brian came into the USC program and played as a linebacker his freshman year. Due to a shortage of talented defensive ends that could play run gap responsibilities with discipline in 2006 the coaching staff simply lined up Cushing at defensive end in 2006 in a two point upright stance and had him play the end position instead of strong side linebacker. This continually "fooled" a lot of people including commentators on TV into thinking that USC was now playing a 3-4 two gap defense. Look closely however...the defensive lineman are in the typical technique spots for a 4-3 defense with one gap responsibilities. Nothing really has changed in Pete Carroll's defensive philosophy - it is still a one gap scheme with an former linebacker now playing an upright end position. Pete Carroll likely learned this style from former San Francisco 49er coach George Seifert who used Charles Haley in this role in the late 1980's. Seifert did this for pass rush reasons, however in the case of USC I suspect it was done for more discipline in terms of outside run containment.

USC of course does not always however rigidly adhere to either of these (4-3 over or under) alignments schemes. The above play was a 2nd and 8 situation where the base defense stayed in place. The play above resulted in an incomplete pass and a 3rd and 8 situation. In this case like most teams USC pulls a linebacker off the field and puts in an additional defensive back (called a nickel back) who was usually Mozique McCurtis in 2006. This makes the front half of the defense look more like a 4-2-5 alignment instead of a 4-3-4 scheme. In addition USC also takes Brian Cushing off the field in many third and long situations and replaces him with Kyle Moore who lines up in a traditional 3 point stance to rush the quarterback. Here is a picture of the following play with four down lineman and Kyle Moore in for Brian Cushing.

4-2-5 Nickel Package versus Cal 2006

As you can see a couple things have changed if you look closely. First there are now four down lineman in three point stances in the picture and they are lined up in the gaps they are attacking i.e. a one gap scheme. Second the defensive end over the tight end is lined up wider in a "jet" alignments (9 technique spot) to try to get up field and pressure the QB on what is a fairly sure passing situation. Third the NT Sedrick Ellis has shifted over from his normal 1 technique position and is also lined up in a 3 technique spot for rush purposes. The alignment had two 3 technique DT's now and there is less chance of either of them drawing a double team block from the center. This leaves the center "uncovered". The danger here is now that the middle linebacker will have to mind both of the A Gaps on either side of the center in the event of a run play. The other inside linebacker has also crept up closer to the line of scrimmage showing blitz in the strong side C Gap. The rest of the Trojan defenders are out of the picture as the Cal Bears spread the field with three wide receivers split out wide. Only one safety is in view deep on this play as the other DB's are in tighter alignment on the line of scrimmage.

Here is an another set of examples from a side view in 2006 versus Washington State. USC attempted more of a traditional 4-3 even look for a few plays during the game with Brian Cushing at the stand up end position. USC seemed to abandon this defensive formation during the second quarter when it became clear it could not stop the outside run game of Washington State (8 gaps to defend with 7 defenders).

4-3 Picture WSU Game 2006

Most of the game they went back to the 4-3 under below that provided better outside run containment support. They also brought a safety down after the snap on several of these plays as well to help get an 8th person in the box. (Note: Sorry but that would take video to show completely).

4-3 Under Defense WSU Game 2006

Here is another picture from the Arizona game later in the season. On this one linebacker Dallas Sartz has dropped down from his spot to cover the tight end on the line of scrimmage. Again like above this makes the defense look like a 5-2 or 3-4 scheme but somewhat confusingly it is what coaches call a "under" version of the 4-3 alignment. It still has one gap defensive responsibilities for each player and the technique alignment spots of a 4-3 under scheme. Here is a slightly blurry picture.

4-3 Under Defense ASU Game 2006

Apologies again for the blurry image on this one.  Here On one end is Dallas Sartz playing outside of Lawrence Jackson. On the defensive right side (offensive left side) in this case Brian Cushing is still in his stand up rush end role. The viewing angle is not ideal for identifying the actual technique spots but if you look closely you can still see they are all in one gap responsibilities.  This comes close to looking like a 3-4 defense and if you just consider the personnel it does have 3 down lineman and 4 linebackers on the field.  The technique spots and gap responsibilities however differ from a 3-4 alignment. Of course an under front can be played (and it is in the NFL, etc.) by 3-4 teams but if you know that already you don't need simple over views like this one to realize the shallow coverage we are getting from the announcers on TV these days.

Here is a picture from 2005 against Fresno State where USC aligned in a similar manner.  The difference of course is that the four defensive linemen are in three point stances.  It is a side view which is not ideal for this sort of viewing and discussion. Brian Cushing as a freshman is playing outside linebacker and covering the tight end.  If the other defensive end on the far side picks up his hand and goes into a two point stance you'd have the exact same alignment and gap responsibilities as the picture above...pretty confusing. 

4-3 Under Fresno State Game 2005


This next picture may confuse some more than it helps but for comparison here is a picture of the 2006 Dallas Cowboy's 3-4 alignment where the two OLB's have indeed dropped down on the edges. It looks similar to the above under scheme of Pete Carroll however if you look closely there are some differences. First the Center and Tackles of the Giants are being played in direct shade techniques and the Cowboys down lineman are not attacking a single gaps. They have two gap responsibility most plays. Or of course they can slant from this alignment and play one gap ball as well.

Dallas Cowboys 3-4 Defensive Alignment

Second the center is "covered" by the nose tackle in the Cowboy's scheme. This is rarely done by USC except in a few exceptional cases with Sedrick Ellis for specific reasons. Third the DT's of the Cowboys are in 6 technique spots directly over the DE's of the Giants. Fourth the three down lineman of the Cowboys are are in three point stances. The two outside linebackers are upright and from this position might either blitz, play run support, or drop into coverage depending upon the play. It looks similar to the above Trojan alignment but strictly speaking it is a different scheme and alignment because of the different gap responsibilities and the exact shade techniques employed by the defense. The devil is in the details of the technique spots which is why it gets confusing.

In USC's case there are of course many other variations to be aware of as these are just some of the basics that I am highlighting. Here is a picture from a game up in Oregon in 2005 against the Ducks at Autzen Stadium.  (Note: This was done in 2006 on third down and obvious passing situations as well.)

4-3 Defense versus Oregon

This picture is from a first down play and it looks like the Trojans are in a 4-2 alignment up front. Although you can't tell the personnel from this distance it is still a 4-3 package as the linebacker split out to handle an extra receiver. (Note: That is the referee between the two LB's and not a USC player). Oregon tried to spread out USC on this play with 4 WR's and 3 of them or "Trips" left. In response a linebacker had to move out of the box and go into coverage mode in response. On a third down and more predictable passing play he'd be replaced by a 5th defensive back.

Here is a play where USC lines up NT Sedrick Ellis in a zero technique directly over the center as a change of pace. Fans and announcers might jump to the conclusion that this is a 3-4 alignment (and personnel wise you can argue that it is). However from a gap responsibility and technique alignment point of view it is a different beast. In this look the Trojans have a zero technique NT and two 3 technique DT's in the scheme. That is different from a traditional 3-4 (which has a zero technique and two six techniques up front like the Dallas Cowboys picture above), differs from a 4-3 Under alignment (which has two five techniques, a one and a three technique up front, or a 4-3 Over (which has five technique, a one technique, a three technique, and a nine technique). This particular scheme below is nothing to coaches as the interior part of the DL (3 tech, 0 tech, 3 tech) of it was used in the old Bears 46 alignment as well in the Arizona Wildcats double eagle flex front...



Anyway, as you can hopefully see from the pictures there is a lot going on with the Trojans defensive personnel up front. This reality is true every season. The lineman move around quite a lot in response to the formation of the offense. Virtually every play there is some small shift in technique or alignment spot that sadly the announcers never even comment upon and even seem oblivious to in reality. I clip pictures from every USC game on TV. What has stayed the same since 2001 and Pete Carroll's arrival is the Trojan's commitment to a one gap defensive scheme and a version of the 4-3 defense. The base defense has been and still technically is a one gap 4-3 under alignment scheme. 2006 was confusing for sports announcers and fans alike as linebacker Brian Cushing lined up in an upright stance and played a defensive end technique spot for most of the season. In zone blitz schemes not discussed here he even dropped back into coverage on some downs to play pass protection. So does DE Lawrence Jackson as well or Kyle Moore at times. That has been done with defensive ends however since Pete Carroll arrived at USC and is nothing new. We'll see if USC continues the use of Brian Cushing in the "Elephant" role in 2007 or if USC moves him back to a traditional SLB role. My belief is that with Dallas Sartz now gone to graduation Brian Cushing will move to the strong side linebacker spot. However that decision will probably depend upon the improvement of Kyle Moore and the development of incoming freshmen Everson Griffin. At least USC has the flexibility to use Brian Cushing at the stand up "Elephant" end position in the 4-3 under defense if needed. For more information on Pete Carroll's concepts refer to the speeches he gave at Nike clinics which are summarized on this site. That should further help to clarify any confusion.